Our next question comes from Lee Wasek with Cantor Fitzgerald. Hi. Hey, guys. I wanted to add my congrats as well Maybe just first question on the manufacturing side. Just wondering if you have enough drug on hand right now for the launch. And when will you be able to ship ship IP one to the patients? And then second, on the confirmatory study. Just wondering if you can share the enrollment status and when you might be able to share into an OS analysis. And is there. FDA requirement in terms of the timeline? Yeah. Thank you. I think there were three questions there. So I'll take the first couple and then I'll add the confirmatory study over to Kostas. So in terms of how much drug supply we have, we have about a year of inventory on hand. So I think we're in good shape there. We expect to ship Rtp1 in approximately 60 days from now. And the team is working very hard to ensure that we can deliver on that. And in terms of the confirmatory trial and timelines, in terms of accelerated approval, current enrollment, I will hand over to Kostas. Sure. Yes. So the confirmatory study, ignite three is ongoing with an overall survival endpoint event driven study. We expect the enrollment to complete around 2030. In terms of recruitment, we have recruited about one third of the study already. And we're moving forward. Opening the ex-US sites. Just to clarify that data, in 2030. Correct. As a reminder, if you'd like to ask a question at this time, that's star one one. Our next question comes from Dana Grabosch with Leerink Partners. Thanks for another question. There's a lot for us to understand here. Two more more commercial questions. I wonder if you've done an analysis of the overlap of your 200 early adopter accounts with those authorized treatment centers that currently offer mtag be and also on the interventional radiologist, do you have a sense of how broad the awareness is beyond the champions? Do identified in IR? In each of the 200 accounts? Thank you. Yeah. So in terms of the 200 accounts, yes. One of the kind of criteria we looked at were there were a number of criteria we looked at for those, as I mentioned, you know, do they have integrated interventional radiology? Do they have intratumoral experience? Are they clinical trial sites. And yes, one of the overlaps is and there's a very significant overlap with and tag treatment centers as you can. Their initial focus is in these hospital based and academic accounts. So I think there's probably an 8,590% overlap with with MTV treatment centers. And. Then secondly, sorry, your question was on. The IR awareness. Beyond those champions. Yeah. Yeah. So we had done, you know, previously as we were preparing for launch, we'd done a lot of work with the interventional radiology groups, both groups like sir. Society of Interventional Radiology and Sio, the Society of Interventional Oncology. So they were very excited and really looking forward to having RP one available. Obviously, we will need to sort of ramp up some of those activities, but I would say in terms of some of the key oncology interventional radiologists and are the key large academic sites, I think the awareness is very good, but that's certainly something we'll be using the sort of next few months to make sure that we are ensure that they have what they need, they're aware and that we're hitting the right people. Our next question comes from Evan Seigerman with BMO Capital Markets. Hi. Congrats, and thanks for taking our question. This is have been on for Evan. So during the Adcom process, it was clear that there was a very large disconnect between how melanoma specialists and regulators felt about Tatarchev and its potential. So coming out of that. How do you think this might create? Applications for the ignite free trial? And is there anything that can be done from a strategy perspective to help bridge the gap there and provide some de-risking into ignite three? Thank you. I don't think there's a lot of. Read over to the i3 study. Firstly, the primary endpoint in i3 is overall survival, which really has, you know, the response criteria and assessment really has no impact on whether the patient ultimately lives longer or not. So I don't think there's a lot of read through on that. I don't think this label and sort of what the discussion was at the Adcom really has much impact on where we expect commercial uptake to be. As I mentioned, the and as you heard from physicians, I think they're very excited about having a different option that treats this really hard to treat patient population. And given the safety and efficacy profile and the fact that we can treat a broad range of patients, I think that's going to trump any sort of conversations or downside from the Adcom. That concludes. Today's question and answer session. I'd like to turn the call back to Sushil Patel for closing remarks. Thank you. So in summary, we are proud to be delivering the first approved oncolytic viral therapy to advance melanoma patients following PD one progression. We're extremely pleased by the broad label received by Tudor Kev, and we believe it provides a novel and differentiated treatment option for patients that has both a compelling efficacy and safety profile. We are incredibly grateful to those internally and externally who fought so hard for patient access to this innovative and important therapy. Thank you for joining our call today. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect. Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Tudor Kiev FDA. Accelerated approval call. At this time, all participants are in a listen only mode. After the speakers presentation, there will be a question and answer session. To ask a question during the session, you'll need to press star one one on your telephone. You will then hear an automated message advising. Your hand is raised to withdraw your question, please press star one. One again Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded. I'd now like to hand the conference over to Arlene Goldenberg, Vice President, Corporate Communications. Please go ahead. Thank you. Operator. Welcome, and thank you all for joining us on this exciting day to discuss the FDA accelerated approval of. Tudor Kiev. I'm Arlene Goldenberg, and I'm joined on the call today by Sushil Patel, our Chief Executive Officer. Kostas Xynos, our chief medical officer. And Emily Hill, our chief financial officer. A short time ago, we issued a press release announcing the FDA accelerated approval of Tudor CEB. The. Press release and the slide presentation to accompany today's call are available in the Investor Relations section of our website at replimune.com. Before we. Begin, I'd like to remind you that any statements made during this call that are not historical are considered to be forward looking statements. Actual results may differ materially from those indicated by these statements. As a result of various important factors, including those discussed in the risk Factors section in the company's most recent quarterly Report on Form 10-q. As well as other reports filed with the SEC. Any forward looking statements may represent our views as of today, August 6th, 2026, only a replay of the call will be available on the company's website. Following its completion. On today's call, we will discuss the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's accelerated approval of Tudor Kev, including plans for commercial launch Following our prepared remarks, we will open the call for your questions And with that, I am pleased to turn the call over to Sushil Patel, chief Executive Officer of Replimune, who will take us from slide three. Thank you for joining us today to discuss the FDA accelerated approval of 2G. Kev, formerly known as RP one. This is a key milestone for Replimune and an even more important moment for advanced melanoma patients who are in desperate need of new treatment options. I want to take a moment to acknowledge the hard work and dedication of the entire Replimune team in getting us to this pivotal stage in our mission. The focus of today's call will be to review highlights of our broad label, reflective of the real world population. We enrolled in the ignite trial in. Addition to the label, we will also discuss the launch strategy and key activities that we believe will enable successful commercialization. We have. Also, operated with a focus on patients and. Today marks an important step in the journey to help as many of them as possible. Patients like. Erin, whose treatment had failed to respond to her initial immunotherapy for advanced melanoma. Erin. And Tudor Kev in combination with nivolumab as part of the Ignite clinical trial. And she has no evidence of disease since completing a treatment, which has allowed her to continue to enjoy life with her friends and family. We are incredibly grateful to the patients, families and clinicians who participated in our clinical trials, as well as the many others, including leading melanoma experts from around the globe, as well as advocacy groups who have supported our work over the past year. Today would not be possible without you. Slide five. Replimune was founded to develop the next generation of oncolytic immunotherapies. To date. The RP platform has been tested in approximately 1000 patients, and we have now reached a major milestone with our first FDA approval. This marks an important moment and opportunity to potentially help thousands living with advanced melanoma. Today, we are proud to announce that the FDA has approved 2G. Kev in combination with nivolumab for the treatment of adults with unresectable advanced cutaneous melanoma that progressed on a PD one antibody based regimen. Slide five. Slide. Seven. Sorry. We are pleased that our label reflects a broad population of advanced melanoma patients, inclusive of all subgroups studied in our trial. The label describes the meaningful clinical effect in noninjected lesions, the ability to treat superficial, deep and visceral lesions, and has no requirement for prior Braf treatment. The label also allows for the retreatment of those who are benefiting from therapy after their initial eight doses. With that, I will turn over to Kostas Xynos, our chief Medical Officer, who will review some of the more specifics than the US prescribing information. Thank you. Sushil. Please advance the. Slide nine. Good afternoon. My name is Kostas Xynos and I'm thrilled to be here today. I will share with you the main points of our US label, as I would like to start with a brief overview of the ignite study. Our global multi-center trial that formed the basis of the two of two accelerated approval ignite was designed to evaluate Rp1 in combination with nivolumab in patients with advanced melanoma, using rigorous criteria for PD one failure as patients had to progress while on treatment. This is an important distinction, as it represents patients with true resistance to checkpoint inhibition, where existing treatment options are limited. In addition, patients without confirmed disease progression were able to continue or re-initiate treatment with P one if it was clinically indicated by the treating physician. This feature reflects how patients are managed in real world practice and allows the treating physicians the flexibility to tailor the therapy based on the ongoing clinical benefit Next slide please. The patients enrolled in ignite were representative of a real world. Hard to treat advanced melanoma population, reflecting what clinicians usually see in their practice. The study included challenging to treat subgroups such as patients with stage four disease, those with prior adjuvant treatment, PD one, PD, L1, negative patients, and those with lung and liver lesions Nearly half of the patients had lung lesions and a quarter of them had liver lesions. Important note is that we observed no overall differences in safety or effectiveness in elderly patients, who often represent a significant portion of the advanced melanoma population. Next slide please. Moving on to the core efficacy data and starting with our primary endpoint, the label reflects the efficacy analysis of 91 patients with noninjected lesion response turyshev plus nivolumab achieved an objective response rate of 24.2%. The median duration of response was 14.1 months, with 55% of the patients remaining in response for 12 months or longer. The clinical results from the ignite trial are further detailed in the primary publication in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. Overall, this data demonstrates that two three Kev delivers deep, durable, and clinically meaningful responses that support its long term value in this disease setting. Next slide please. Kev is an off the shelf treatment practically for everyday clinical practice that minimizes logistical complexity and treatment delays and ensures that patients with aggressive disease receive immediate care dosing and. Ministration is designed to be simple and flexible for healthcare professionals with a dose calculated as 1ml/cm of tumor diameter with up to a maximum of ten milliliters injected. Clinicians will have. Versatility when choosing which lesion to inject, including both superficial and visceral lesions. Our guidance is to prioritize the most rapidly growing or largest lesions, whether new or existing, provided they are suitable for injection Importantly, in terms of scheduling, Kev does not need to be given the same day as nivolumab. Next slide please. Here I want to briefly show you how intuitively our therapy is administered to. Kev is injected directly into the tumor. All images are included in the Uspi guiding injections. This slide illustrates the injection techniques for superficial tumors and demonstrates the straightforward and versatile administration techniques for two Kev, making it easy for healthcare providers to deliver the drug effectively to both superficial nonulcerated as well, as well as ulcerated tumors. These are standard and well understood injection techniques, both in dermatology and oncology, requiring minimal specialized training and can be performed by all hcp's, including physicians, physician assistants, nurse, nurse practitioners and registered nurses. Next slide please. These images address how our therapy is delivered to deep or visceral tumors, which are often the sites of more advanced disease in organs such as the lung, the liver, the kidney, or deep lymph nodes. Interventional radiologists are very familiar with these injections, as they routinely perform them. These injections can be considered simpler than a biopsy. As a much thinner needle is used, deep injections are performed under image guidance. Typically, ultrasound. For more accessible organs like the liver or CT scan for deeper lesions like the lung, assuring accurate placement and maximize safety for IRS. This is the everyday life, as these are routine procedures. Common daily practice for them. Next slide please. Combined with. Nivolumab is generally well. Regimen with no reported contraindications. The most common adverse reactions were generally mild to moderate, consistent with previously reported data and were predominantly grade one and two. Constitutional type side effects. Importantly, there were no grade 4 or 5 common adverse events. On the right hand side of the of the slide, you can see some additional safety highlights. A critical safety finding is that there has been no reported transmission to close contacts. Furthermore, two three Kev can be managed as biosafety level one, which is the lowest possible biosafety level and can be effectively cleaned using standard disinfectant procedures Next slide please. In closing, this is the trial design of our confirmatory study. Ignite three. That will also serve as the foundation of our global patient access. Ignite three is a global randomized trial of rp1 in combination with nivolumab versus physician's choice in advanced melanoma patients with a primary endpoint of overall survival. The study is well underway, and it is expected to complete enrollment in 2030. Thank you very much for your attention, and I will now pass it back to Sushil to walk you through our commercial strategy. Moving to slide 17. Thank you. Kostas. We are now laser focused on delivering 2G curve to advanced melanoma patients. We know there are roughly 10,000 advanced melanoma patients a year in the US who progress on a PD one containing regimen. Who could be candidates for treating Kev plus nivolumab Roughly 20% of these patients will present with superficial lesions only 20% will present with both superficial and deep lesions, and the remaining 60% tend to present with deep lesions only. It's important to remember that the. Until today, there really was only one FDA approved option. We very much look forward to providing a much needed additional option for a broader population of these patients, including those with hard to treat visceral disease. Slide. 19. As as our team begins product promotion, our strategic focus will be to position. Kev as a. The first choice after progression on a PD one containing regimen. In an effort to generate awareness and demand for. True to Kev. As specific launch strategy will be grounded in three critical success factors. Firstly, instilling confidence to drive targeted and rapid adoption. Second, we really want to ensure a positive experience and seamless patient journey And one of the unique groups we've established to enable this is the Operational Excellence Team. This is a cross-functional group of oncology nurses, pharmacists and interventional radiology experts dedicated to working with new treatment centers to establish true Kev's operational workflows. The team's efforts will accelerate site activation and ensure that positive first experience and drive. Repeat use. And finally, we want to ensure that we deliver a meaningful value proposition for all stakeholders. Slide 20. During profiling last year, our teams met with nearly all of our early adopter accounts with several key insights identified throughout that profiling process. For example, our teams have a clear path in understanding who the interventional radiology and medical oncology champions are. In roughly 90% of these accounts. The team has also received significant proactive requests for engagement immediately following approval. Slide 21. In regards to the early adopters that I just mentioned, these 200 accounts represent the accounts with the highest patient treatment potential based on claims data. They typically have the most well interventional radiology teams within their centers, and all have prior intratumoral injection experience. In order to establish a strong launch foundation Our team's initial focus will be on establishing two Kev in the early account adopter accounts. These represent about 30% of the national melanoma patients treated annually. Once established in early adopters. We'll then add to our focus the next 250 accounts, which will represent in total, just over half of the patient treatment volume in the US. Longer term, we'll then roll into the next 750 accounts, which will allow us to reach about 80% of the potential patients treated annually. Early in the launch, the majority of our patients will be treated in the hospital setting. With this evolving to a more balanced mix across hospital and non-hospital settings over time. Slide 21. The. Slide 22. Our team. Will continue to ensure payor coverage is in place to support usage. To date, the team has presented pre-approval information exchange presentations to national and regional payers who represent nearly 80% of medically insured lives, which we believe will help establish a streamlined process for coverage policies and will continue to focus on this closely in the months to come. Where the. Rats are injected with Kev by an interventional radiologist in the hospital for deep lesions, or a medical oncologist or nurse in their office Meaningful procedure codes already exist. Finally, during the period of time when a new oncology product is approved and awaiting a permanent J code to help facilitate reimbursement, we typically see a site of care shift from the community into the hospital setting, where reimbursement is more easily supported for. The majority of patients with deep lesions. This is exactly where we want them to go. Since this is where interventional radiologists tend to practice. Once they're. In addition to the procedure codes being in place, place. Most accounts will benefit from. Three four TB pricing. Since two Kev is administered on an outpatient basis. Finally, for oncologists who want to maintain that patient, treatment continuity, they can begin begin administering nivolumab for up to two years in their office, where where reimbursement is already reestablished. So again, we believe that today's reimbursement model supports the patient journey that we're looking to establish with the availability of 2G. Kev. Now this patient journey is shown. Here on slide 23 begins once a patient has progressed on a PD one therapy and the medical oncologist selects two to care for their patient. The treatment selection process has become more streamlined. Given that our final label doesn't require prior Braf targeted therapy before starting treatment with Kev. To expand a little further on the patient journey, once Kev is chosen, a key next step in the process takes place when the multidisciplinary treatment team collaborates on establishing a patient treatment workflow, where the team will review the scan and create a plan. We've surveyed more than 100 medical oncologists, and 97% said they are willing and interested to collaborate with interventional radiology and the IR community has been very enthusiastic to adopt our P one. Selecting an appropriate dose based on patients tumors has also been simplified with our straightforward label dosing guidance of 1ml/cm. Once. It is in the channel, we will be implementing our drop ship next day delivery model across treatment settings to quickly meet the anticipated demand. While demonstrating a strong sense of urgency for patients. On the day of administration. Two, Kev injections are administered in the outpatient setting with standard cleaning procedures in place to help further support routine usage. Another critical step in the treatment journey is, of course, having a meaningful patient and provider support program in place to ensure that positive treatment experience. Next slide. Slide 24. On that front, I'm really pleased. To announce that the Replimune Connect Plus our patient and provider support program will be available in the coming weeks ahead of drug in channel. In addition to the traditional offerings, we are proud that Replimune Connect Plus will have a suite of concierge. Level offerings, including on staff nursing support to address treatment related questions. Text message reminders of scheduling and appointments through our caseworkers with additional support services available to caregivers. In establishing a depth of understanding of the advanced Melanoma market as well as our patient resource resources, which include the development of Connect Plus an important step in the process was ensuring we stayed close to the needs of our providers and the voice of our patients. With that, I'll turn it over to Emily Hill, our chief financial Officer. Thanks, Josh. On slide 26, I'd like to start by describing some of the pillars for the P one platform to drive our long term success First, we are proud to. Have our own in-house manufacturing facility based right here in Massachusetts, where we have the capacity to support not just the imminent launch, but long term global commercial supply of Rp1 and future p x. Expansions. We expect to start shipping two from this facility within approximately 60 days. We expect the cost for a typical to have real world patient to be approximately 450 000 for a course of therapy. Overall, we believe this pricing is in line with comparable treatments for advanced melanoma and reflects the efficacy and differentiated safety profile of Tetracap. On slide 27. With this approval, we have de-risked the PP platform and now have the opportunity to unlock additional value. Our pipeline here shows how we will start to achieve that value for patients and shareholders. These trials are designed with the aim to bring benefit to patients beyond skin cancers. We are. Said to have achieved the milestone of approval. We have a number of exciting milestones ahead of us. As we transition to a commercial company. We look forward to our first time reporting to revenue and future data publications to support potential Nccn listings for P one. In addition, we look forward to sharing updates from our reveal and HCC, BTC studies. Replimune has the right components to become a leading and highly valuable oncolytic immunotherapy company with an experienced team, a development plan guided by clinical evidence, and now our first approved product. We look forward to delivering on our long term potential with. That I'll turn the call over to the operator for Q&A. If you'd like. To ask a question at this time, please press star one one on your touch tone. Telephone and wait for your name to be announced to withdraw your question, please press star one one again. Our. First question comes from Ali Bratzel with Piper Sandler. Hey, team, big congratulations on the news today. Maybe just just the first question for me. How has the. The widely publicized nature of the RP one review process just affected physician and patient awareness and expected adoption trends? And then just just the second one from me, just looking at the, the, the efficacy data on the label, section 14, it looks like FDA got their 91 patient, 24% RR analysis in their. Does that matter at all to docs or to payers? Just any thoughts there. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for the question. Firstly, you're absolutely right. We've had tremendous awareness. And I think one of the sort of benefits of the Adcom was just the tremendous sort of public and physician support and awareness it's created for P one. And I think when you listen to the open public forum, it was very clear that this is a treatment that patients very much need. And physicians want. So in that regard, we think this actually is actually a very positive thing for us. And actually looking forward to being able to meet that demand in terms of the, the 24% number. Yes, we believe that's determined from the efficacy evaluable population from the FDA, and that's 91 patients with at least one noninjected lesion, which resulted in an RR of 24.2%. We don't believe that that's going to be a challenge for us in any, in any way, shape or form, given the unmet need given. I think the breadth of the profile. The efficacy and safety profile we bring to these patients who are clearly an unmet need, we don't believe this will be a significant hurdle to adoption and actually very much looking forward to communicating the efficacy and safety benefits of Thuja Kev to our prescribing population. And again, we don't also expect any payer issues with the data, given the FDA approval. The data will also be submitted to Nccn in the very near future. Thank you. Our. Next question comes from Roger Song with Jefferies. Great. And my huge congrats for this achievement. And thanks for taking our question. Maybe two from us. One is, you know, given the the label and then the pricing and then the awareness, how do you think about this? Launch ramp? Going to look like second is in terms of the confirmatory study? Understanding FDA used to. Have some comments around the design and then just curious, have you get alignment on the the confirmatory study compared the arm and then the primary endpoint. And then when should we expect to see the data from that confirmatory study? Thank you. Thank you for those questions, Roger. I'll take the first question. And on the confirmatory trial, I'll ask Carrie our regulatory lead, to take that one. So firstly, you know, I think we have a very competitive label. And in terms of what the commercial uptake looks like, you know, I think this is a profile that physicians and patients want, as I mentioned. But however, we really want to make sure that physicians and patients have a positive initial experience and we're in the process of rehiring our commercial team. As I mentioned in my prepared remarks, we expect the initial uptake to be in hospital based settings where temporary J codes can be utilized, and there are in-house interventional radiologists. And over time, we expect to expand into these community practices. We do believe that will become a new standard of care for patients who progress on a PD one containing regimen. And given the size of the patient population pricing, we believe this represents a significant market opportunity. And then, Cory. I think you had a question on the confirmatory trial and whether there was any communication with the agency in terms of the appropriateness of that study. Right. Thank. You know, we have not had any requests from the FDA to make any changes to that study. We've discussed it with them along the course of the way, and at this point, we're expecting to have our overall survival data endpoint readout in 2030. Got it. Thank you. Our next question comes from Dana Grabosch with Leerink Partners. Hi. Congratulations from me as well. Many questions here. The first one in this 91 patient subset, the 24% that made it on the label, that looks pretty much the same as what we saw in the briefing documents. And FDA separately had some concerns with response analysis for some patients. Was there no overlap or did they get over their concerns? I just wondered where that landed and how you ended up with this 91 patient response to. Analysis. And then the second question is if you can help us understand the pricing breakdown for the average real world patient where you quoted a price per course. Thank you. Thank you. In terms of the the 91, our understanding is the patient the FDA determined an a patient needs to have at least one Noninjected target lesion. So that's all we can really comment in terms of how they got to the 91 patients. It was very similar, as you mentioned, to the sensitivity analysis they had in their briefing book that presented the Adcom. And in terms of the pricing breakdown, I'm going to hand that over to Emily, who will address that. Thanks. So we described a price of 450 000 per typical real world patient. That's based on a volume use of 18ml. As you may be aware, the volume of Chichikov per. Patient is based on their tumor burden and in our ignite study, we saw a median use of 18 mills. Of course, there is a range of volume used in patients that will be above and below that. But we are basing the typical real world. Patient price off of the median experience in the ignite study. Thank. You. Our next question comes from Anupam Rama with JP Morgan. Hey guys. Huge congrats to you guys. Really a testament to your guys's perseverance and persistence here for for for this patient population. Really cool to see. Quick one from us on the top 200 accounts. Can you remind us of the size and scope of your initial field team to kind of address that first 30% of advanced melanoma patients? And with drug. Being shipped out here in the next 60 days or so, like, where are you on the build out of that team? Thanks so much. Yeah. Thanks. Anupam. So. We're about a third of the way through the overall commercial build out. Ultimately, we expect to have about 50 commercial, including field facing teams that'll be around 20 or so. Sort of sales representatives. What's been really exciting is that a number of the team has actually come back to Replimune, because I think they very much believe in the mission and what we're trying to do for patients. So we've already got a group of reps and sales managers who already have good training and understanding of the product. And now we're currently in the process of hiring the remainder of those. So, you know, watch this space. I think we're in good shape right now, and we look forward to being able to bring our P one to patients very soon. That's again, guys. Our next question comes from Lee. Wasek with Cantor Fitzgerald. Hi. Hey guys. I wanted to add my congrats as well. Maybe just first question on the manufacturing side. Just wondering if you have enough drug on hand right now for the launch. And when will you be able to ship ship IP one to the patients? And then second, on the confirmatory study, just wondering if you can share the enrollment status and when you might be able to share interim OS analysis. And is there FDA requirement in terms of the timeline? Yeah. Thank you. I think there's three questions there. So I'll take the first couple and then I'll add the confirmatory study over to Kostas. So in terms of how much drug supply we have, we have about a year of inventory on hand. So I think we're in good shape. There. We expect to ship P one in approximately 60 days from now. And the team is working very hard to ensure that we can deliver on that. And in terms of the confirmatory trial and timelines, in terms of accelerated approval and current enrollment, I will hand over to Kostas. Sure, yes. So the confirmatory study igniter is ongoing with an overall survival endpoint, event driven study. We expect the enrollment to complete around 2030. In terms of recruitment, we have recruited about one third of the study already. And we're moving forward opening the ex-u.s. sites. Just to clarify that data, in 2030. Right. As a reminder, if you would like to ask a question at this time, that's star one one. Our next question comes from Dana Grabosch with Leerink Partners. Thanks for another question. There's a lot for us to understand here. Two more more commercial questions. I wonder if you've done an analysis of the overlap of your 200 early adopter accounts with those authorized treatment centers that currently offer mtag be and also on the interventional radiologist, do you have a sense of how broad the awareness is beyond the champions? You identified in IR? In each of the 200 accounts? Thank you. Yeah. So in terms of the 200 accounts. Yes. One of the kind of criteria we looked at. Well, there were a number of criteria we looked at for those. As I mentioned, you know, do they have integrated interventional radiology. Do they have intratumoral experience. Are they clinical trial sites. And yes, one of the overlaps is am. And there's a very significant overlap with antagonist treatment centers as you can. Is our initial focus is in these hospital based and academic accounts. So I think there's probably an 8,590% overlap with with the treatment centers. And then secondly, sorry, your question was on. The IR awareness beyond those champions. Yeah. Yeah. So we had done, you know, previously as we were preparing for launch, we'd done a lot of work with the interventional radiology groups, both groups like sir Society of Interventional Radiology and Sio, the Society of Interventional Oncology. So they were very excited and really looking forward to having P one available. Obviously, we will need to sort of ramp up some of those activities. But I would say in terms of some of the key oncology interventional radiologists and other key large academic sites, I think the awareness is very good, but that's certainly something we'll be using. The sort of next few months to make sure that we are ensure that they. Have what they need. They're aware and that we're hitting the right people. Our next question comes from Evan Seigerman with BMO Capital Markets. Hi. Congrats, and thanks for taking our question. This is have on for Evan. So during. The Adcom process, it was clear that there was a very large disconnect between how melanoma specialists and regulators felt about. Cab and its potential. So coming out of that. How do you think this might. Create. Implications for the ignite Free trial? And is there anything that can be done from a strategy perspective to help bridge the gap there and provide some de-risking into ignite? Thank you. I. Don't think there's a lot of. Read over to the I. Three study. Firstly, the primary endpoint in i3 is overall survival, which really has, you know, the response criteria and assessment really has no impact on whether the patient ultimately lives longer or not. So I don't think there's a lot of read through on that. I don't think this label and the sort of what the discussion was at the Adcom really has much impact on where we expect commercial uptake to be. As I mentioned, the and as you heard from physicians, I think they're very excited about having a different option that treats this really hard to treat patient population. And given the safety and efficacy profile and the fact that we can treat a broad range of patients. I think that's going to trump any sort of conversations or downside from the Adcom. That. Is today's question and answer session. I'd like to turn the call back to Sushil Patel for closing remarks. Thank you. So in summary, we are proud to be delivering the first approved oncolytic viral therapy to advanced melanoma patients following PD one progression. We're extremely pleased by the broad label received by Tudur Kev, and we believe it provides a novel and differentiated treatment option for patients that has both a compelling efficacy and safety profile. We are incredibly grateful to those internally and externally who fought so hard for patient access to this innovative and important therapy. Thank you for joining us today. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.